Tatvajnaana

-Compiled by Sri A.R.Ramachandran

Tattvajnana of Sri Madhva

A Study By His Holiness Sri Sri Vishwesha Thirtha Swamiji, Sri Pejavar Mutt, Jagadguru Sri Madhvacharya Samsthan, Udupi, S.K.

Dharmaprakash Publications, Madras – 7, 1971

No Copyrights Related Details Mentioned

Foreword

By

Vidyabhushana, Shastranidhi, Dvaitavedantarasajna Dr.B.N.K.Sharma,

MA., P.hD., D.Litt, UGC Professor of Samskrit, Ruparel College,

Bombay – 16.

This summary of one of the contributions of H.H. Sri Sri Vishwesha Tirtha Swamiji of the Sri Pejavar Mutt, Udupi, published some years ago as part of the ‘Sri Madhvamunivijaya’ in the Mincinaballi publications from Dharwar (1958) is a masterly survey and an illuminating exposition of the place of Sri Madhvacharya and the part played by him in the history of Indian philosophy. It also contains a beautiful and very readable exposition of Sri Madhva’s principal philosophical tenets.

The matter and manner of the Swamiji’s exposition are alike impressive. He is known for his cogent, reasoned and persuasive presentation of philosophical doctrines. The lucidity of his exposition is indeed marvelous. The work shows in a very able and convincing manner how Sri Madhvacharya’s philosophy as a whole represents that truest and the most complete reaffirmation of the ancient philosophy of the Vedas and other source books of Hinduism in its pristine purity – freed from the cobwebs of subsequent misconceptions and misinterpretations of later generations. With a keen insight into the highways and byways through which India’s religious and philosophical lore had traversed in the course of its long history from the Vedic to the Buddhistic and Post Buddhistic times, Sri Vishwesha Tirtha has shown with ease and felicity and in his most disarming way of explaining the contradictions and inadequacies of rival interpreters, how Sri Madhvacharya answers to the perennial problems of religion and philosophy such as problems of Karma, Jivaswarupa, relation of matter and souls to God have been arrived at after the most careful and dispassionate examination of all that had been said and could be said on those problems by various other thinkers.

The method of exposition followed by Sri Vishwesha Tirtha is both generic and philosophical. It strikes a thoroughly modern and scientific note in its approach while being uncompromising in its adherence to the advocacy of the truth; it keeps a thoroughly unprejudiced mind in its criticism and evaluation of views for and against various topics examined in the course of its survey.

Every unbiased reader will feel deeply grateful to the Swamiji for his most illuminating and animated exposition of Sri Madhva’s Tattvavada, as the highest expression of India’s philosophical contribution to thought – viewed in its proper perspective. Many of our young men and women who feel baffled by the exasperating conflict of theories and isms passing under the banner of Hinduism will find here a sober and sublime light to guide them in their quest of truth. My friend Shri K. Raghupathi Rao deserves warmest thanks for the trouble he has taken in giving a fine rendering in English of the Swamiji’s valuable writing in Kannada – and bringing it to the notice of a wider circle of readers. I have no doubt that contents of this brochure will secure reverent appreciation from readers from across the seas as well as from many earnest men and women in our own country.

28 – 2 – 1970

Tattvajnana of Sri Madhva

By His Holiness Sri Sri Vishwesha Thirtha Swamiji, Sri Pejavar Mutt,

Jagadguru Sri Madhvacharya Samsthan, Udupi, South Kanara

Part One

India is the motherland of many religions. Many religions originated here, developed and prospered. Many more coming from outside found in India a ready home. In other countries of the world, normally only one religion flourished. Not so in India where followers of many different faiths live in large numbers. Even in the Hindu religion there are various and different concepts and these have grown up substantially. There are many who say that this difference in approach to religion is indicative of disunity among Indians. This diversion in our mutual bickering about religion, has led to the invasion of India by various people during our long history, as there was no unity in India. Even in the most difficult times, when national unity was of paramount importance, our religious leaders have failed to rise to the occasion on account of their religious differences. They have been therefore blamed for the subsequent slavery under various invaders. When the country itself faced foreign invasions, these religious leaders were indulging in their own quarrels. This is the general hue and cry raised against our religious leaders and the blame for disunity amongst us is placed at the doors of our religion.

However, unity in a nation should not be artificial. Forced unity either on the basis of religion or any other ground indicates incivility and degradation. The minds of people are not machines to be ordered about. None should stifle the various patterns and new ideas that continuously occur in the minds of people, in the name of false unity. This would greatly hamper the vitality of the nation. The calm prevailing in the burial ground and the unity seen in the totalitarian country are not what the people desire. The presence of various religions in our country is indicative of the freedom to pursue independently the religion which appeals to one most. India alone provided the forum for expressing one’s views without fear or favour. It also provided safety for those who professed the same religion to work together and live their religion. Their independence in this sphere was upheld by the Kings. When uni-religion states in other parts of the world were literally burning men belonging to alien religions, India alone could take pride in having provided a home for people of all religions. Their kings built temples for the Hindus, vihars for Buddhists and so on. When the people belonging to other religions were persecuted and subjected to all kinds of torture, India alone gave protection to even those who professed no faith in God and even totally denied His very existence. India guaranteed the independence of every one of its citizens to search for the truth in his own way and subscribe to the thought that appeals to him most, as also its propagation without, of course, infringing the rights of others. Owing to this generosity and tolerant approach, hundreds of religions have made India their home. Therefore, there is nothing that we should be ashamed of in this. In fact, we should admire the broadness of outlook of our ancestors, who have at all costs maintained the freedom for spiritual enquiry.

It might be said that these religious leaders did not take active part in fighting for political freedom in their times. Even this will only be a partial truth. By their devotion to religious pursuits, they have preserved the culture intact, in spite of political slavery. They have, by their sacrifices, held intact the wonderful cultural heritage and thus deserve our gratitude. When many civilizations have lost their entire cultural heritage too with foreign invasions, as in Egypt, even after many and persistent invasions and slavery for hundreds of years if our cultural heritage remains today, we owe it to these religious leaders. This is no small effort. By their steady manifold activities in the religious fields, they have preserved in the nation, the love for spiritual inquiry even at the exclusion of material comforts and considering the times they had to face, their work truly assumes great importance. The true religion of India was held intact through all these changing and vicious times. They have preserved the flame of spiritual inquiry pure and glorious, through all the darkness our country had to pass. The services rendered by these religious leaders in upholding the cultural heritage of the nation is second to none. Truly, posterity has to be eternally grateful to these religious leaders.

Now, we of this generation will have to consider calmly the various faiths that have evolved and developed both in India and the world. Just because many religions have sprouted, not necessarily all of them are true. We should understand and weigh each religion by our scientific inquiry, dedication to truth and unbiased approach. Even though all spiritual leaders have set out to find out the truth and preach that truth, we cannot assume that all of them have found the truth. If we assume that all of them have preached only the truth, then there is no place for difference at all that we see today.

Some satisfy themselves saying ‘Truth is not absolute. It has many facets. Each one has taken one aspect of the gigantic form of the Truth and explained it in his own way. That is why we see contradictions. All that every one of them has said is Truth. But they have said about various facets of Truth. That is the reason why we see differences in various faiths. Therefore, the inquiry as to which religion one has to follow is not necessary. We will arrive at the Truth by following any of the many religions” One can easily see through the fallacy of such a false satisfaction.

By following such a course, we may explain many wonderful aspects of the Truth. But we cannot reconcile contradictory statements about the basis of Truth. One may have many limbs of various forms and shapes. One may have sense of varied strength and nature. One may describe one part and another some other part. Both may be the truth to such an extent only. But if one says that a thing exists and another contradicts it, both cannot be then true, at the same time. When we have such mutually contradictory statements about the world, soul, God – their nature and qualities, professed by various religious leaders, if we say that all of them are true statements, that will only be travesty of truth. If we say that the statements made on the various aspects of a thing are true, we can understand that. We can also understand many wonderful aspects explained about a thing, but not mutual contradictions. We cannot also understand the statements of two religions, one saying a thing exists and another other denying that very existence. We can, for example, accept as truth two persons eating different parts of a mango fruit explaining the parts tasted by them as sweet or as sour, but we cannot accept as truth of the statements made by them, one saying that it is part of mango and the other denying it to be the part of mango simultaneously.

Thus, even if we do not accept as the truth of all statements made by various religious leaders, in their pursuit of truth, they certainly deserve our reverence as seekers after truth. Similarly, even when we know that scientific discoveries made by earlier scientists have been proved wrong by subsequent discoveries, we give them the respect due for their pursuit of knowledge to uncover the mysteries of nature. We do not for instance blindly follow all that they say. We subject their findings to the touchstone of the truth as we know, weigh and then follow. We reject what we have after close scrutiny consider as false. Our desire is that every aspirant should bring in this broad outlook and desire for truth in the field of spiritual inquiry also, so that each one could weigh for himself, sift the truth and then follow that truth with conviction. If we proceed on the basis of accepting as truth all the statements made by all the religious leaders, we would soon find ourselves in doubts and our progress in the spiritual pursuit will be at stand still. While we should have reverence for all the religious leaders as seekers of truth, we should with unbiased approach, weigh the teachings of all the leaders and ascertain for ourselves as to which of them are true and which of them false. We should see as to where the truth lies, by bringing in our unbiased faculties to judge the interpretations offered by various leaders. We shall accept only that which is finally passed by our scrutiny and judgment for our subsequent pursuit. Only this kind of scientific approach will help our people to pursue the spiritual inquiry which will contribute to our spiritual evolution. In such an approach to spiritual inquiry, there is no place for mutual rancor, hatred and other anti feelings.

Our aim is the search for truth. We examine all that others have said in this matter. We select for ourselves what is passed by our unbiased judgment. In the light of the approach enunciated above, it is necessary now to scrutinize the tenets of various systems of philosophy, trying to explain to us the meaning of this world, our life here and hereafter.

Part Two

The eternal Vedic religion flowed continuously for many years on end until the arrival of Buddhism in India. Buddhism sought to cut at the roots of Vedic religion and create doubts in the minds of its followers. To this day these doubts persist. Many forms of Vedic religion have absorbed tenets of various religions that have subsequently come up, in their daily practice. There are many changes that have taken place owing to this challenge from other religions. Hindu religion today is not what it was prior to the influence and the subsequent impact of other religions on it. Even the ritual forms have changed considerably. Thus, the influence of Buddhism on Hinduism is both considerable and far reaching. Great religious leaders like Sri Kumarila Bhatta and other tried to resurrect the Vedic religion. We can see the influence of Buddhism on him in that he too established a godless Vedic religion. Even the religion sponsored by Sri Bhatta which accepts the validity of Vedas and rituals as per the Vedas, denies the existence of God. This clearly shows the enormous influence that Buddhism had on its founder.

Sri Sankaracharya too tried to establish Vedic religion against Buddhism. But the influence of Buddhism was so great that he too could not get out of its clutches. Sri Sankaracharya’s Advaita is full of tenets of Buddhism. He was thus unable to resurrect the Vedic religion to its pristine purity. He utilized the various tenets of Buddhism and presented them in the garb of Vedic religion. This has been the complaint of many against him from his times. Even though this was a mixture of Buddhism and the old Hinduism, the credit of turning the tide in favour of Vedic religion goes to him. Hindus again began to look to Vedas as sources of knowledge. To this extent all followers of Vedic religion ought to be grateful to Sri Sankaracharya. The exemplary dialectical skill displayed by Sri Sankaracharya even at that early age and winning over allegiance of the Hindu masses for Vedic religion is a glorious chapter in religious renaissance. In his time there was opposition to Buddhism from Sri Kumarila Bhatta’s Vedic religion without the Godhead. Sri Sankaracharya entered the arena at this time and taking the acceptable tenets from Bhatta’s Vedic religion and from Buddhism, placed before the people a mixed religion based on Vedas and Buddhism. He enriched this with his own style of debating skill and explanatory ability. The result of this was that both Bhatta school of Vedic religion as well as Buddhism lost their placed in the hearts of people. This is a great achievement by any standards. Thus, Sri Sankara’s Vedic religion came to be known as ‘Bhatta’s Vedic Religion in practice’. Even Vinobhaji has pointed out the similarities of approach between Buddhism and Advaita. Thus, Sri Sankara in the act of opposing Buddhism became its own victim, in that he accepted its major tenets in his exposition of Vedic Religion.

The message of Buddhism as well as Advaita to the world is that the visible world is only an illusion and is the representation of untruth. At the root of all this is only one principle which has no quality or no form. We have to now see how far this represents the Vedic religion as well as how far it stands to reason and scrutiny with respect to sacred texts. Even though the world is transitory and not permanent and there are instances for illusion, the scientific world of knowledge of today is not prepared to accept the world as illusion in the sense propounded by Buddhism or Advaita. There is established order in the various things that we see in this world. All the wonderful aspects of the world follow some set pattern for their continuing activity and the scientific investigations conducted so far clearly prove that the world is no illusion, but is as real as anything that can be. It is not as though the activities in this world take place as in the fictions of the ‘Arabian Nights’.

What is not applicable in practice is well nigh useless. They cannot attract nor hold the allegiance of reasonable people. Aims that are contrary to experience and aims that are incapable of accomplishment can safely be assigned to the archives. No well intentioned and reasonable person who pursues truth can be attracted to these. Advaita reveals these qualities in plenty. Its tenets are incapable of application to the world of experience. Advaita which has for its base the Vedas, gives prominence to devotion and rituals prescribed in the Vedas and Puranas. In the day to day world of experience, enough importance is given to worship of the deity, devotion, rituals and other aspects of a Truth seeker’s life. But what connection is there to the final aim of acceptance of Truth and to these day to day practices? To say the least, the life of devotion and rituals is just a show and the truth seeker would naturally look down upon these practices as mere exercises in futility. If the Supreme God of auspicious qualities is a mere conception with no qualities and no form, what necessity is there to give Him form and offer worship to Him in our day to day lives? Why should we again create in ourselves artificial devotion to such a God? If we suggest to ourselves that this world is an illusion , that it is like seeing silver in the shell or like seeing the blue colour in the sky, and then artificially ask ourselves to offer devotion and worship, is it not height of imposture? Can any devoted heart find fulfillment is such an artificial approach to God? By performing acts of devotion to which we know for certain to be illusion, we not only fool ourselves, but also subject ourselves not to our spiritual progress but to its degradation. Thus a philosophy which has no connection between its ultimate aim and actual practice can do no good to its followers. If out of blind belief there is a surge of reverence towards Advaita, a true seeker of Truth would straight away reject it as one with no aim, no purpose and incapable of practices in life. Therefore this philosophy is one which has no connection to our day to day life in this world and to such values which we value most in our lives such as devotion to God, performance of one’s own allotted duty in life, faith in attaining good qualities, good conduct, as all these are applicable only to this illusory world of our imagination. What will be the consequence of such an approach to philosophy? One does not have to explain these things further. Suffice it to say that we are in need of a philosophy the aim of is capable of being implemented in this world of our day to day life and which has tenets capable of being practiced. Also where there is no contradiction between the aim and the practice.

Further according to Buddhism and Advaita tenets, the creation of the world is purposeless. Also it is incapable of explaining how the world came to be created. If we can understand for example that a real thing of no qualities, cannot undergo any change or transformation and added to it that it cannot have any influence over any other thing and without the influence of any external agency cannot create anything, we cannot certainly understand how a thing of no qualities can create the world. How did the soul for example get the inclination for multiplicity originally? How is it again that this wonderful universe get superimposed on the soul? These remain questions without answers to this day. According to Advaita the following example is given to explain the origin of the world. Even though there is only one lamp, if it is surrounded by hundreds of reflecting mirrors, the lamp being reflected in these appears as many lamps. Similarly one reality appears as many in this world. But this is not conclusive. For the lamps to appear as many there are hundreds of real mirrors. But in Advaita there is no second principle to reflect the one real. This quality less one real has no second real principle to make it appear as many in this world of illusion. This is the stumbling block which Advaita fails to answer. There are others who explain this as the semblance of Maya on the pure Consciousness. But there is no separate existence to Maya apart from the pure consciousness. Then the question comes as to how did the first impression of Maya occur to this pure Consciousness? It is not possible to accept one reality at the exclusion of all others and then establish the creation of the world. Thus the pure Consciousness without any quality whatsoever, without any external influence whatsoever, and without any purpose whatsoever, cannot be concluded to appear as the Universe. This explanation of the origin of the Universe will not appeal even to a lay man. How will it then stand the scrutiny of the men of Science with all the knowledge of science that they have mastered today? Therefore from the concepts of Buddhism and Advaita, even an ordinary citizen of the world cannot get satisfactory answer to the origin of the world. The Seeker of Truth has necessarily to look else where for the answer to such investigation.

Now let us turn to philosophies which accept the reality of the Universe as well as its creator. These tell us that God Himself became the world, out of His creative power. World is the transformation of God. Souls are particles of God. Separated from Him by ignorance, they are yet his parts. The God Himself descends to imperfection and becomes the soul. Since God Himself out of His desire changed Himself to the world, the world too is real. The particles of God which have separated from God and have become the souls become united again in God ultimately. Sri Bhaskaracharya, Sri Vallabhacharya and recently Sri Arobindo Ghosh follow this concept and have propounded their theories on this basis.

The Truth seeker cannot get satisfaction even from this explanation. If God Himself transforms into the world, then what is the purpose of such creation? In Advaita, the world is taken an illusion covering the pure consciousness due to the action of Maya. Since it is only an illusion, even if an explanation for the creation of the world does not come forth, no great harm is done. But in this, the complete God, out of His own free will transforms Himself into the world and at the same time gives rise to innumerable particles of Himself, which become the souls, clouded in ignorance and trying to get to Godhead? What is the necessity for all this? Is it the pleasure of God to descend into ignorance and suffer the trials of the world and experience all the sorrow? Further if God had descended to become the souls, all the souls just become actors of a drama, no more. So no effort is called for getting liberation, not is it called for to undergo privation and exclusion of all material comforts for the sake of such liberation. These worldly practices become meaningless exercise – exercises in futility. The creation becomes purposeless, the God’s leela becomes the experience of anguish, the rituals mere stage play and no truth seeker will willingly undergo such hard ship, for he is God Himself.

If we say that the particles divorced from God, do not find fulfillment unless they again become one with God, and if this thought for fulfillment drives them through various efforts towards reaching God, then we have to give up the idea that God Himself descended to become the World. Further if a complete object descends to become incomplete, we have to assume only that this object was never really complete and so it ceases to be God! And if a change in god is to occur, then surely there must be some other power, greater than that God. Then again God cease to be Supreme. So this concept of God descending to become the world and His particles descending to become the souls, completely destroys the supremacy of God as well as makes Him subject to change by some other superior force. And since this school also accepts no other agency other than god, there is no other force that could bring about the necessary change of God into world or the souls. Thus this concept of Gold becoming the world, as well as becoming particles to become souls both seem to be impossible of occurrence and there are lot of contradiction as shown above.

Further, saying that the finite, bound, incomplete, suffering all sorrows, souls as parts of God, is a total rejection of God as complete in all aspects.

“Purnamidah purnamidam purnatpurnamaducyate”

“purnasya purnamadaya purnamevavasishyate”

Thus, if a part of the complete is incomplete and with blemishes, then that original complete form cannot be termed as complete. We see many qualities in the world, which did not have for their origin in the God - passion, hatred, sorrow, ignorance and many other such qualities which we see in the souls and the material objects are not accepted qualities of God. The qualities that we see in the world are different from those of God and in fact are the very opposites of those we see in God. So how can anyone accept that this world is the transformation of God? How did the qualities which were not in God get mixed up in the world? Why should there be so much sorrow in this world which is the transformation of God? There are no answers for such questions.

Similar question also arise if we examine the tenets of Christianity and Islam. These religions too accept God as the store house of all auspicious qualities and that He is different from the world. But they explain the origin of the world in the most crude and unscientific way. They do not say for example that god transformed Himself into this world. But they say that God by His will, without any material created the world from nothing. From a scientific view this seems impossible. Without a primordial matter, this world with all its wonderful things could not be created as if from a magician’s bag. It cannot also for example be accepted that there was nothing else besides God, prior to Creation. In fact the cause for rejection of the pursuit of spiritual knowledge in scientifically advanced countries is the supply of such half truths incapable of standing scientific scrutiny. Even though Christianity and Islam accept the reality of the world, the supremacy of God and God as the storehouse of all auspicious qualities and all other such concepts which are useful to a practical life in this world, they are not supported by scientific examination of the concepts, nor are they scrutinized by logical challenges and so they have to give place sooner than now before the scientifically inquisitive world opinion. Their main support has throughout been from blind faith or forced faith and not conviction. They are incapable of convincing the modern educated and well informed youth. Instead of saying that God created this world from nothing, it may be preferable to say that this world is only an illusion and not real as the Advaita says. This may have greater appeal. Whatever the final truth, that these religions have accepted that the souls are the servants of God and God is the master of the world is an advance over the earlier concept that god alone exists and that every thing else is illusion. These religions have also gone a step further and have given credence to such useful qualities in life such as devotion to God, devotion to duty and other qualities which are useful in day today life. In these respects they are nearer to truth and so they demand our respect to that extent.

Still the question remains, for example what is the purpose of the creation of the world? Why should there be the world? Why is it this way, and not in any other way? These questions still remain unanswered. Why did the supreme god suddenly decide to create this material world as well as the souls? Why did He not remain in full satisfaction in His own state of completeness and supreme happiness? Why did He have to experience the misery of worldly existence? Why should He create the souls and then ask them to pursue the life of worldly existence with all its bondage and misery? Why should He again make arrangements for their bondage, order, liberation and so on? Just as before creation, God could have remained absolutely contented in his own existence, without the trouble of creation the matter and souls and then go after them correcting them? Why should there be difference between individuals in a world created by God and where the souls are also created by Him? Why should God take pleasure in subjecting the souls created by Him to all sorts of misery in this world? Why did God provide this world with all miseries and make it the place of residence for the souls created by him? Why did He not create a place full of happiness for the souls created by Him? In the creation of the souls, why did he not make them all alike or uniform, but show difference in the various souls? Can we accept that the God who created such a confusing and contradicting world as all powerful, complete, full of auspicious qualities and benevolent? This miserable world in fact goes against the acceptance of the existence of God Himself? These and similar question still remain unanswered by the religions covered so far. For these religions have taken place in the concepts of people and have not been subjected to the tests of the seeker after truth. They therefore will have to have way to greater religions.

Sri Ramanuja, the founder of Srivaishnaism has gone further than those so far enumerated. He has accepted the reality of the world, the reality of the souls and their independent existence apart from God. He has also given great importance to soul’s devotion to God and thereby made the life of the soul meaningful and recipient of good qualities. He has accepted that the primordial matter prakrti as eternal. He has placed the primordial matter, the souls and the world as the body of the god. But he was also unable to get across the cross currents of spiritual atmosphere of his times and so has taken the language of Advaita to cover the concepts he has in his mind. He has not rejected outright the concepts of Bhaskara and Sankara that God is both the material and immediate cause but has clothed the same concept in a different way, at the same time accepting the reality of the world. This only shows how difficult it was for him to go beyond the concept of Advaita. However credit is due to him for re-establishing the Vedic religion on the devotional platform with the acceptance of the Supremacy of God, the reality of the world and soul. When we can visualize how difficult it was to swim against the prevailing currents of the times, it is natural for us to bow our heads in reverence to the enormous work done by him for the resurrection of the Vedic religion. We can certainly say this much that Sri Ramanuja’s exposition of the Vedic religion is nearest to Truth among the religions so far covered.

Still the question remains as to why God created the world this way and no other way? According to the tenets of Vishistadvaita, even though the souls are eternal and uncreated by God, they were alike and of same essence at the beginning. Then how did the difference that we see in the world come about? Beginning with the same faculties and essences why did not God make them all similarly happy, and all of good qualities only? Why did he make each one different from another? These questions still remain. If in the world we find qualities endowed in the souls that are not originally in it, when we have to assume that these have been endowed on it by god. Why should the all merciful equi-disposed, benevolent God endow some souls with good qualities and some others with wicked qualities, that too without any reason? This militates against the concept of the Supremacy and completeness in God. To day the question asked by the materialists is also the same. If there were a God, all supreme and all merciful, then why did He create a world of difference and with varied endowments? The same question has to be answered by any philosophy which has to claim that it has the truth to preach. If as in Advaita, we way that Karma is responsible for variation in attainments, then as all souls have stated from the same point, why should each soul have a different attainment? Why should there be different Karma for different souls? If, as Sri Ramanuja says, all souls have same attribute in essence at the start, then why this difference? This forms the hot iron pill, which the various religions so far covered are unable to swallow. The materialists and the Atheists put the same question in different forms and make the believers in God answerless.

The Saiva Tattvajnana which accepts the reality of the world also accepts that the soul and Siva are identical. Then how and why did Siva descend to the form of incomplete soul in this world? What is the purpose of this creation which shows a difference between Siva and the soul? To start with as there was only Siva or one Atma, how did the difference crop up in this world? Is it possible that there is some other more powerful agency which is capable of inflicting real sorrow and bondage on even Siva? Similar questions stare in the face of the protagonists of this view.

Thus when we subject each one of the religions so far enumerated with unbiased inquisitiveness, though we come across many favourable and impressive tenets, our questions remain unanswered. We do not find the answers for the most glaring questions of inequity that we see in this world. We do not for example also get a balanced and convincing answer for the relationship between God and the world, the relation between our life in this world and our pursuit of spiritual knowledge and similar quest remain unexplored. To that extent these religions too remain away from the ultimate truth. The thirst of the Seeker after Truth is not satiated. He is not prepared to proceed with conviction in the pursuit of spiritual knowledge with such doubts remaining unanswered.

As we see the many short comings in the approaches made by the religions so far enumerated, it is reasonable to assume that Truth will not be revealed by following these paths. We want a philosophy which will not only answer all our doubt not cleared by those so far referred, but such a religion should also be what is sanctioned by authority. This religion should also be capable of being practiced in life, useful in this world as well as capable of being interpreted scientifically. This we can clearly see from a dispassionate consideration of the writings of the religious leaders so far referred and the writings Sri Madhvacharya. No true student of unbiased disposition will fail to perceive the truth explained by Sri Madhva. The Vedic religion which lost its pristine purity by the influence of Buddhism, went through various changes during the years that rolled by since and found again a clear exposition only in the writings of Sri Madhva. It was given to Sri Madhva to again establish the supremacy of Vedic Religion. He has clearly answered every question that a true aspirant will come across in his pursuit of spiritual knowledge for the ultimate goal of life, a life of liberation from the bondage and true happiness.

Part Three

According to Sri Madhva’s philosophy, Sri Narayana is supreme. He is the store house of all auspicious qualities in their fullness. He is without any blemish whatsoever. Prakrti or Nature, soul and material world are all real and are at all times different from Him and are subject to His control. All activities take place only at His instance. He is always independent. Starting from Goddess Lakshmi and through all the gods and souls, there are different and graded souls. The graduation does not melt away even in liberation.

Aseshagunapurnatvam servadosha samujjhitih

Vishnoranyacca tattantramiti samyag vinirnayah

Svatantratvam sada tasya tasya bhedasca sarvatah

Muktanamapi bhedasca

Nirdoshatva ramayasca tadanantarata tatha

Brahma saraswati vindra sesharudrasca tatstriyah

Sakra kamau tadanyeca kramat mukta vapitica

Satsiddhanta iti jneyo nirnito harina svayam

This knowledge of the right philosophy has originated from God Himself, says Sri Madhva. In this philosophy, all the questions so far remaining unanswered are answered.

According to this philosophy, God has created the world for the realization of the intrinsic nature of the souls by themselves. This creation of the world is a great act of mercy on the souls by God. It is also His pleasure. The souls putting forth their best efforts towards liberation find true nature of their souls and are able to realize their intrinsic nature, which is their liberation and fulfillment. God has taken upon Himself to create this world to provide the field of action for the souls to evolve themselves to attain the true knowledge of their intrinsic worth. This is the greatest mercy that God could confer on the soul.

‘Jiva evatu dukhinah tesham dukhapraharanaya srutirescha pravartate’

The scriptures carrying the message of the God also have come into being for the removal of the sorrow of the souls. God, who is not subjected to any order, binding or bidding, who is complete and full of happiness always, has willingly taken upon Himself, out of His compassion, to create the world so that the unliberated souls may work up their salvation and attain to eternal bliss.

‘Strakshyehi cetanaganan sukhadukha Madhya smpratpaye tanubhrt – svabhava sambhutaye’ (Tatparya Nirnaya)

For the God, Who is Happiness incarnate, this act of creation is not tiring in the least. In fact, it is His pleasure and sport.

‘Soyam Vihara ihame’ – Tatparya Nirnaya

Thus, creation is both purposeful and sport of the Supreme Lord. This creation by God is no illusion but real. Therefore, in this world, which is the field of action for the soul, the soul by doing good actions and dedicating itself to such noble qualities as truth, compassion, renunciation, helping others, non violence, being free from hatred, it is able to elevate itself and at the same time support goodness in the world. By performing all actions as service to God, with no fruits of action in view, it is able to purify itself and at the same time, elevate itself step by step. This step leads for pure disposition, in which it is able to contemplate and dedicate itself to the higher aspirations of life and live a life of devotion to God. As it elevates itself, it is able to realize its true relationship with God – Bimba Pratibimba bhava – or eternal metaphysical dependence of the soul on God. The soul is then able to realize the nature of God with respect to itself and by His grace attain svarupananda – eternal bliss due to realization of the true nature of itself and its relation to God. Thus, the ultimate goal of the soul, the relationship between soul and God, and the practical life of good conduct, right living in this world do not contradict each other. In as much as the world is real, the activities that have to be undertaken in this world need not be neglected as unconnected with the ultimate aim, as in Advaita. In this philosophy, the field of action has not been thrown into the field of ignorance. It has been established in the field of truth and with the background of knowledge. Action or performance of one’s duty has not been relegated to the field of ignorance or as something which need not be seriously performed. Performance of one’s duty has been prescribed as the action to be performed by an aspirant desiring to work up for liberation. Service to society has been given a pride of place in the scheme of action prescribed for those who aspire to work for liberation.

‘Nanajanasya susrusha karmakhya karavanmiteh’ – Gita Tatparya

Thus, the service to society and fellow beings has not been left as an option, but is made conditional for the aspirant in his way towards liberation. No other religious teacher has given so much prominence to social service as Sri Madhva has done. Thus, the vitality of life of the Vedic religion which was lost due to the onslaught of Buddhism, has been restored to its pristine purity by Sri Madhva, by upholding as must the life of Bhakti Yoga and Karma Yoga. We are made again to live and learn a practical philosophy which is useful both to this life and the life after. Sri Madhva by establishing the difference in souls and the reality of the world was able to show purpose for God’s creation and its necessity, also giving at the same time the due importance of various sadhanas, with proper background for the soul’s evolution in this world.

God did not transform Himself into the world nor did He create the world without any primordial substances, so to say from nothing. This has been conclusively established by Sri Madhva. God is the Lord of the world. Prakriti is the primordial matter from which this world is created. God entered the subtle form of matter and by His activating power, created the world which we see. There is nothing unscientific or improbable in this creation. In even the minutest of particles scientists have discovered a motive force. God by His infinite power is able to enter into the minutest of particles of primordial matter, which is the material out of which this world is created. This primordial matter has not been created by God and is eternal. With the activitization by the entry of God, the primordial matter takes the shape of the physical world. Thus creation has been cogently explained by Sri Madhva.

The differences that we see in this life also have been properly explained.This philosophy does not accept that souls have been created by God as in Christianity and Islam. If God had created the souls, why did He not create them alike or with the same attributes or intrinsic values? What is the purpose of creation of souls? And many other similar objections arise. So, Sri Madhva accepts that souls are eternal and uncreated by God. They are subject to the control of God. The nature and intrinsic essence of each soul is its own particular specialty, unshared with any other. They also exist in it eternally. Just as the flame and its effulgence are inseparable, so also is the soul and its intrinsic essence. These intrinsic essences and their nature are different for each soul and no two souls have identical attributes. These form the guidelines for the lives that they live in this world. By following this intrinsic nature of the souls, they experience happiness and sorrow in this life. God provides the field for the development and display of these intrinsic attributes and so is not partial to any. Each soul works up its way according to its nature and God provides the field and surroundings for its fulfillment. He is indifferent to the variations in the nature of souls. Even though God is the moving principle behind all actions, He is not responsible for the variations in the nature of souls, which are eternal. The cause for the differences that we see is the variation in nature of the individual souls and their subsequent achievements in their respective progress towards their self fulfillment. Sri Madhva has thus clearly shown the most knotty problem of philosophy and explained clearly the Vedantic explanation for the differences in the world of action. Then the question may arise as to what is the function of God in this creation? If each soul works out according to its intrinsic nature, then what necessity is there for God? This would be a natural question. The explanation offered is as follows: Even though the nature and intrinsic essence is fixed, their fulfillment depends on the entry and motivation by God. If there is no God, all these souls will become immobile. Therefore, even though God is not responsible directly for the wonder of creation, it cannot go on without Him. Therefore, here is the absolute necessity of God for the continuous work of creation of the world and all its activities.

We thus see that Sri Madhva’s philosophy answers all the questions encountered by the spiritual aspirant. For all the questions remaining unanswered in other religions, there are satisfying answers in Sri Madhva’s philosophy. This philosophy has been built upon pure logic, scientifically and with great care. But one should not imagine that Sri Madhva has taken whatever is attractive or convenient and has built his system with a view to make it attractive. Indeed, he has only assiduously sifted the Vedic religion from the confusion to which it has been subjected by religious leaders since the onslaught of Buddhism. He has not added one new concept which is not there already in Vedic religion. He has only removed misinterpretations and proved from the thoughts that flow through the fountain heads of source books, the correct knowledge. He has not interpreted Vedas as he pleased. Wherever there was a genuine difficulty in the correct interpretation of the Vedas and the Upanishads, he never deviated from the source books for correct interpretation and scrupulously avoided the coloured versions of the earlier commentators, who were more or less influenced by the impact of Buddhism on the Vedic religion. Thus, the credit for resurrecting the Vedic religion to its pristine purity should go clearly to Sri Madhva. By quoting at each step from the sacred literature, Sri Madhva has completely kept himself in the background in interpreting the sacred literature. He just made the meaning of the sacred literature clear from the quotations culled out from the sacred literature itself, so that personal colouring was scrupulously avoided. He was known to have carefully collected various copies of source books from all over the country and established a huge moving library, which was the target of attack of his contemporaries. Sri Appaya Dikshita has made a baseless attack on Sri Madhva with regard to the source books referred. But none during the time of Sri Madhva, not even his most critical opponent Sri Trivikrama Pandita has leveled this charge against Sri Madhva. Time intervening between the time of Sri Madhva and that of Sri Appayya Dikshita could have rendered the copies of books referred to by Sri Madhva inaccessible. Contemporaries of Sri Madhva were satisfied with the source books referred to by him and it is worthy to note that none of them leveled this baseless charge. Had Sri Madhva been unable to show the source books in his time, there would have literally been a pell mell. The opposition he had to encounter was not small and they would have not have certainly kept quiet and swallowed all that Sri Madhva said, especially Sri Trivikrama Pandita who was the most renowned Advaita scholar of that time. Not even did Sri Vidyaranya who wrote commentaries on the Vedas dispute the references quoted by Sri Madhva. It is also to be noted that many opponents of his, had an eye on his great library and are reported to have stolen his books too. It was natural for the opponents to destroy his library for without them, they could dispute his references. Suffice it is to say that none disputed his references in his time. It will also be appropriate to say that Sri Madhva was the only great research philosopher who re established the Vedic religion and gave nothing on his own as new philosophy. He has by his research and uncommon insight given rational answers to the problems facing the spiritual aspirants.

Sri Madhva’s system is known as ‘Dvaitavada’. He was the first to classify all principles under two categories viz., Independent and Dependent and hence the name for his philosophy. But it has been surmised that this name was given to his philosophy in recent times and that the original name for his exposition was ‘Tatvavada’. That this system is called by the name ‘Dvaitavada’, there is no evidence –

‘Yovipralambha viparitamatiprabhutan vadan nirasya krtavan bhuvi tattvavadam’

In this, his exposition has been referred to as ‘Tattvavada’. Again, Sri Jayatirtha, his commentator par excellence has referred to his exposition as – ‘tattvavidovadanti’

‘Pare ca tattvavade(s)smin gariyasi bharo mama’

Sri Vadiraja Swamiji too has referred to it as ‘Tattvavada’. In another place, Sri Vadiraja Swamiji has written that ‘Tattvavada’ is the correct name for Sri Madhva’s exposition.

‘Namna catyulla samtyasit vallite yuktimallike’

Sri Vadiraja Swamiji has after an unbiased consideration of the exposition of Sri Madhva and Sri Sankara, has accepted Sri Madhva’s exposition as most satisfying. Thus the system founded by Sri Madhva may be appropriately called as ‘Tatvavada’ as it has been known throughout, including the reference by Sri Madhusudhana Saraswathi in his work called ‘Advaita Siddhi’.

Supremacy of Lord Sri Vishnu

Sri Madhva has established the supremacy of Lord Sri Vishnu very ably. In his exposition Sri Vishnu is Supreme. He is full of auspicious qualities. He is without blemish whatsoever. These form the cardinal principles. He proves that establishment of Sri Vishnu as the Supreme God as the most considered meaning of all the scriptures – Vedas. The Vedas have for their meaning only the praise of the auspicious qualities of Sri Vishnu. They are also conducive to the liberation of good souls. Freedom from bondage and attainment of liberation is possible only by constant meditation on God and obtaining His grace. In order to meditate on Him, it is necessary to develop reverence and deep attachment to Him. Only if we love a object we think of it continuously. If we are to contemplate on God continuously we have to develop a continuous love for Him. Only by thinking of His auspicious qualities that we are able to develop reverence and love for Him. Only by thinking of His auspicious qualities that we are able to develop reverence and love towards Him. Then we will be able to contemplate on Him continuously. The Vedas which hold the key for the revelation of God to the soul for its liberation also holds the greatness of God, so that the soul may develop reverence towards God. Thus, we see the purpose of the Vedas as the establishment of God as Supreme and also to reveal to aspirant soul the greatness of God, so that the soul may develop a constant love for God, by which it is able to think of God at all times and get His grace. Therefore, Sri Madhva contends that the purpose of all sacred literature is to establish the supremacy of God and develop a reverence for God in the aspiring soul, so that in the fullness of time, it is able to constantly concentrate on Him and win His grace and thereby experience the continuous joy of liberation. Now the question comes as to who is this Supreme God? Whether is Vishnu or Siva or Sakti or any other deity as established in various faiths? We have to come to some conclusion on this point of difference too. In Puranas and Vedas we find it being narrated that Vishnu is Supreme in one place and at another place Siva being extolled as Supreme and in some other place Hiranyagarbha. This gives rise to seeming contradictions. If we are to take at the face value these readings, we may have to come to the conclusion that the Vedas convey no continuity of thought and that they are like statements of a lunatic, with no connections whatsoever between the various statements. In one place it refers to Siva as Supreme and in another place it refers to Siva as the servant of Vishnu and His great devotee and yet in some other places it refers to Siva and Vishnu as being identical. We cannot therefore accept all these statements which are seemingly contradictory. We must probe for the significance of such statements and light is thrown on these in the Puranas. How can we find a cogent meaning for all these statements? Again in the Vedas, we find at some places Agni being extolled as Supreme. Therefore, we must find that key which unravels the meaning of the seemingly contradictory statements such as these.

Sri Sankaracharya in his various stotras has given rise to greater confusion. There is a bundle of contradictions between the truths enunciated in his system and the stotras he has composed, between the nirguna aspects he has so assiduously established and the stotras he has composed in praise of the deities as for example –

‘Haribrahmadi na mapi nikata bhajamasulabham siva tava padambhoja bhajanam

’

Wherein he has extolled Siva, saying that the devotion at the feet of Siva is difficult of achievement even to Vishnu and Brahma.

In another place –

‘Vedhah padatale patatyayamasau vishnurnamatyagratah sambhuh dehi hagacala’

‘Brahma has fallen at the feet. Vishnu prostrates and Siva stands in front. Show your mercy on him too’ addressing Tripurasundari.

Yet again:

‘Brahmendrarudra, marudarka kirita koti sanghattitanghri kamala’

‘That the feet of Lord Vishnu is in contact with the head ornaments of Brahma, Siva, Indra and others’ while praising Sri Vishnu.

From these statements, it is not that Sri Sankara has established equality between Vishnu, Brahma, Siva and Durga but that among the many gods of saguna denominations, one may consider that any among them as superior to any other depending on one’s devotion to particular deity. When Islam and Christianity can claim allegiance to one Supreme God, how is it that Hinduism propagates meaningless different gods? This has been the platform for ridicule against Hinduism. When we create many gods, select one of them and then say that others are lower in rank to the deity, how can you expect allegiance or devotion to any god? In fact in this there is neither reality in practice nor percept. Therefore many god precepts are not only anti Hinduism, but that it is also not the meaning of the Vedas.

Sri Madhva has enlightened us in this question also. The real meaning of Vedas and all Puranas is that Sri Vishnu is the Supreme God.

‘Vede ramayane caiva purane bharate tatha’

Adavantau ca madhye ca Vishnuh sarvatra giyate’

If at different places other names like Rudra, Hiranyagarbha are referred, they are only other names by which Sri Vishnu is referred. Sri Vishnu alone has been referred to as Rudra, Indra and other names in the Vedas and Puranas. When Brahma, Rudra and others have been referred as the devotees of Vishnu, these names refer to the corresponding gods who are evolved souls. Thus where we have Siva and Vishnu as one; Siva and Vishnu as Supreme and where we have Siva and Brahma as devotees of Vishnu, we have cogently to interpret as Vishnu who is also known by all the names when referred to as the Supreme God, and Brahma and Rudra and others who are referred to as His devotees as elevated souls in the ranks of gods who worship Vishnu.

‘Yo devanam namadhe eka eva’

Which means Vishnu alone bears the names of all other gods and that He alone is the Supreme God worshipped by all these names. Again:

This sruti refers to :

‘ajasya nabhau athyekamarpitam’

by which is meant, One who has lotus at the navel viz., Vishnu. Thus, Vishnu alone is referred to by various names of gods. Also all names referred to in the Vedas and Puranas have for their prime import only Vishnu as the Supreme God. This in fact gives the Golden Key to unravel the meaning of the Vedas. Having found this key it is now possible to cogently render all meaning for the various visibly conflicting statements. To this also the credit is due to Sri Madhva, who had the uncommon insight into the correct import of the Vedas and other sacred literature. Thus, in the Narayana Sukta, Vishnu has been referred to as:

‘sa brahmas a sivah sa harih sendrah so(s) ksharah paramah svarat

’

This obviously does not mean that Brahma is Vishnu, Siva is Vishnu and Indra is Vishnu. But it only means that Vishnu has the names such as Brahma, Siva and Indra, in fact, all names referring to gods. In the Brahmasutra Bhasya, Sri Madhva conclusively proves how every epithet addressed to the gods refers in the prime import only to Vishnu. Therefore, Vishnu alone is Supreme. He alone is full of auspicious qualities and without any blemish whatsoever. Thus we see that the Supremacy of Sri Narayana is the import of the Vedas and all other sacred literature, which we term as Sanatana.

The credit for establishing One Supreme God again goes only to Sri Madhva, for he alone was able to sift the meaning of the Vedas clearly and establish one Supreme God who is Vishnu. He clearly broke through the conceptions of all gods being equal and several conventions arising there from. Sri Madhva hoisted the flag declaring the allegiance to one Supreme God Vishnu and preached the Vaishnava concept of living. Even though there are many gods, who are evolved souls in their various gradations, Supremacy is attributed to one and only God, Vishnu. In the Bhasya for the Atharvanopanishad, Sri Madhva traces the cream of knowledge – Tatvajnana relating to the Krtayuga or the best of times and explains clearly the original concept of One Supreme God Vishnu and how subsequently this concept got clouded due to misinterpretations galore.

‘Kale krtayuge tada naiva cendradi namani vishno ranyatra kutracit

brahmarudrendra purvestu namabhih procyate harih’

‘Devatatvena cejyah sa brahmadya manunamakah’

‘Vaktra pitrtvena karitvenauvacadarat / iyjante devatah sarvah natu

devataya kvacit’

In Krtayuga Vishnu alone was being worshipped as God by epithets such as Brahma, Rudra and Indra. Other gods were addressed with epithets such as preceptor and ancestor and not as God. Thus we see that the concept of God prior to Buddhism was of one Supreme God and the rest were only dependent gods who derived their powers from this One Supreme God Vishnu. Subsequent to the influence of Buddhism people in their confused ideas referred to every god as God, each one claiming superiority over the other gods. This however has no sanction in the revealed texts or source books of Hinduism. Sri Madhva has thus answered the criticism against Hinduism which is described as a religion of many Gods.

Sri Vishnu who is known by all the names of gods, has all the forms of gods and resides in the forms of all in the subtle form. Thus, Vishnu resides in all gods and souls in their respective forms, but in subtle form. Thus, in Sri Madhva’s exposition the Supreme God Vishnu, who is full of auspicious qualities, who is responsible for the creation, who is blemishless, independent and present everywhere, is not subject to contradiction in terms of names and forms. He can be called by any name and worshipped in the form of any god, but with this concept that He is the antaryamin or the presiding deity in that god. The following –

‘Brahmani brahmarupo(s) sau Sivarupi sivesthitah’

‘Uddipayan devaganamsa Vishnurdevena rupena’

testify that Vishnu has the forms and attributes of all the gods and all the souls.

‘svasarirantargatavicitra bhagavadakara sadrsakaravatva matrena pratibimbatva muktam’ (Sri Vadiraja Swami)

Thus, even though Sri Hari can be worshipped in various forms and names, we should not forget that He is Supreme, full of auspicious qualities, and other essential attributes of the Supreme God. This is the greatness of Sri Madhva’s exposition.

We have so far said that the Supreme God Sri Vishnu could be called by various names such as Brahma, Rudra and any other. Yet there is a specialty with respect to two words referring only to Vishnu viz. Vishnu and Narayana as they have the same meaning as for ‘Om’ and ‘Brahma’ which mean that He is complete and full of auspicious qualities and the above two words have the same meaning. Therefore, these two words have become too common names to the Supreme God.

Gradation among the gods:

Even though the Supreme God resides in everything and is responsible for all activities that are taking place, some importance is given to the lesser gods in the working of the day to day affairs in the world. They have been made the abhimani devatas or the presiding deities for the various material objects and they carry out the Will of the Supreme God. Being under the control of the Supreme God, they reside in the various material objects in the world and activate their functions. The principle of Lakshmi is most important of these god aspects. Goddess Lakshmi is the presiding deity of the primordial matter – Prakriti, and is considered as the Mother of world and consort of Sri Vishnu. She is eternally free and comes next in rank to Vishnu. After her comes the creator of the world Brahma who is first among the released souls. Then comes the preceptor of the world, Sri Vayu, the presiding deity over the wind. They are main participants in the creation of the world after Vishnu and Lakshmi. Sri Madhva is none other than this Vayu, in his third incarnation, the previous two incarnations being Sri Hanuman and Sri Bhima. It is he who re-established the Vedic religion, after it was in a confused state owing to the influence of Buddhism. Then Goddess Saraswati – the presiding deity over learning, Bharati – the presiding deity over devotion, Rudra – the god presiding over the mind, Sesha – the god presiding over the serpent kingdom, Garuda – the god presiding over the bird kingdom, Parvati – the presiding deity over right inclinations and Indra – the lord of heaven and other gods follow in that order. All these gods follow in order, the control of the Supreme God Vishnu at all times and they have individually no power other than what is vested in them by the Supreme God. Thus, knowledge of all materials in this world and the presiding deities over them help the spiritual aspirant in his march towards the grace of God for ultimate liberation.

The Five Differences

It is now necessary to clearly understand the relationship between the Supreme God Vishnu, His servants and souls, who are the aspirants for liberation and the field of action which is this world, which Sri Madhva accepts as all real. When we analyze, we see five fold differences. They are differences between -

1. God and souls

2. God and matter

3. Souls and matter

4. Between souls themselves

5. The difference between matter itself

These have been termed as the five fold differences. Only when we correctly understand these five fold differences, we are able to understand the nature and meaning of this world. Only then we are able to place the Supreme God, the soul and matter in proper perspective. Further, the soul is able to place the many traits of material things like the body and mind and that of the Independent God without getting mixed up with them thinking that those traits are its own, and thereby release itself from the influence of the ego which makes it tread the wrong path. The soul is also able to realize its own relations with respect to the material things as well as that of the Supreme God and treading the correct path through this correct knowledge, will be able to attain liberation by the grace of God. These five fold differences have a great significance in Sri Madhva’s system.

Mukti and Taratamya; Liberation and Gradation

In Sri Madhva’s system liberation means that the souls by the sight of God and getting His grace realize and experience the true nature of themselves in their subtle form of knowledge, bliss and other qualities. The soul which has all along been considering qualities which are alien to itself as its own in its passage through the mundane existence and thereby undergoing untold miseries – qualities such as passion, hatred, ignorance and so on. This great blunder alone is termed as bondage –

‘Pramadatmakatvat bandhasya’ – Bhashya

From the sight of God, the soul realizes its true nature and thereby is freed from the bondage which has pinned it down to sorrow. In liberation, the soul experiences its true nature of knowledge, bliss and devotion to God and being free from baser qualities, which had been afflicting it in the world, enjoys uninterrupted happiness thereafter.

‘muktirhitvanyatharupam svarupena vyavastitiah’

Just as the burning charcoal covered by ash, is freed from the ash by the action of the wind burns brightly once again, the soul covered by ignorance, but freed from it by the wind in the form of Grace of God lives brightly again in the knowledge of its true nature which is bliss.

‘Muktirnaijasukhanubhutiramala’

For this liberation, God’s sight, as well as constant devotion and ultimately

God’s grace are necessary.

The bliss experienced by different released souls is not identical, but vary with nature of different souls. As the souls are not all identical, and their intrinsic essences are different and varied, it is only natural that the bliss experienced by them is not identical but varied. Similarly, the effort and achievement of each soul in attaining liberation differs so that each soul just experiences its true nature and this experience is different from any other soul. There is thus a gradation in the experience of bliss, but each soul is given in full measure the bliss due to its nature, so that no soul is envious of some other soul having a different measure of bliss. There is thus a gradation even in liberation and for their continuous joy they still depend on the Grace of God. But in the released state, there is a sense of complete fulfillment and each soul experiences in full measure, its nature just as different persons carrying vessels to the sea and taking full quantity of water in the vessels taken by them, have no cause to envy another taking a bigger or smaller vessel. The principle is that each vessel is full. Similarly each soul finds fulfillment and is not worried whether some other soul has greater bliss or less. The concept of liberation in Sri Madhva’s system is thus both attractive and meaningful and at the same time stands to reason and scientific explanation. To attain this form of bliss which is its own, the soul has to fly purposefully with the two wings of devotion and renunciation, towards God with speed and that should be the constant aim of all souls.

Conclusion

Sri Madhva’s system can briefly be condensed as follows; ‘Sri Vishnu who is worshipped by the Vedas and all sacred literature, is Supreme. This world which is both the sporting ground of God and the field of action of the souls is real. The souls which are dependent on and different from God work out their salvation according to their intrinsic essence of nature. By pure devotion and Grace of God, it should be the aim of each soul to attain the true nature of itself, which contributes to its eternal happiness. This is capable of being understood from the revealed literature, the source books, perception and logic.

We desire that this true knowledge should be studied by one and all and spread throughout the length and breadth of the world, so that the aspirant souls may understand the true significance of Sri Madhva’s philosophy and by following the direction given by him, work out their salvation and enjoy the bliss, which is of their own.